So there is this great movie that I've watched in two of my math classes called Donald in Mathmagic Land. It was nominated for an Academy Award in 1959 and became the most popular Disney educational films. Basically Donald Duck goes into this "wonderland" of math and learns a lot. I learn a lot with him when I watch this, and I suggest it- its only 27 minutes.

 I didn't mention this in class the other day because I could not remember the title of the movie but I there is an excellent film adaptation of Alice in Wonderland that was not mentioned. I had never read Alice in Wonderland before and so I never truly understood the movie but it very orientated around Alice. The movie is called Phoebe in Wonderland and it is kind of new (2008) and it has some well known actors even though the movie is independent and was never in theaters. I already spoke to Anne and she said this was fine. The movie is about a little girl who can't seem to follow the rules and she only feels at home when she is playing Alice in her school play. She also has intense hallucinations that actually involve the red queen etc.

At the beginning of the course I remember being the one of the few to claim the necessity of genres and clarifications in the literary world. Although I still stand behind my statement I have realized that the way I viewed classification systems in January is not how I see them now. On Thursday (03/18) when we were discussing Alice in Wonderland being a fantasy vs. narrative vs. parody I realized that the lines boxing in the different kinds of genres are not as defined as I once believed. That being said I do not think that they have no use. Similar to Anne (please correct me if I misunderstood your words), I think that if one looks at genre for purpose rather than truth then they are very helpful.

ShaynaS: Why did you choose to write about genre in your paper that we read?

Wai Chee: Analysis and outward reach, on a large and small scale. So many texts fall into so many genres, brings many popular works into conversation.

Well, we have now reached a milestone: we at least "officially" know each other's names.

At the beginning of class the final three students listed the names of everyone else in the class (we are hoping that, unlike Alice, they remember their own names and identities). We then discussed the evaluations that were posted here, taking special note of complaints of self-editing and the interface of Serendip.

Our discussion turned to reactions to Wai-Chee's visit. A few students noted that they had been surprised by her definitions (either finding her definitions too narrow on some points, to wide for others).

Instead of buying a hard copy Alice in Wonderland, I found the full text online. I know that the point of reading the work was to actually 'read a novel' and get back to books, so is what I did in some way "against" what the point was? If the story was obviously taken from "a novel" and just posted onto a separate medium, does that actually change what it is? This reflects back to the Walt Whitman Archive, but I still can't quite get my mind around it. Is my Alice in Wonderland now different from those of the book-readers, just because I read it off of a computer screen?